2014/09/20

I received this morning the last book by Henry A. Kissinger : "World Order", Penguin Press, 2014, 420 p., ISBN 978-1-59420-614-6, released this month.

This blog post will be updated to collect my remarks and reading notes during the following months, taken with the following spirit: because Kissinger is one of the most known person who developed the conception of "using Globalization and Wars to create a Centralized, Iniquitous and Absolute New World Order", I will answer tit-for-tat his arguments in order to develop the conception of "using Globalization and Peace to create a Multipolar, Rightful and Respectful World Order".

[8] a) A 2012 paper, ‘A Study on Optimal Scale of China Gold Reserves’ co-authored by the Vice-President of the China Gold Association recommended that by 2020, China’s optimal reserves should be 5,787 – 6,750 tons. If the State Council has followed this recommendation then the PBOC should currently hold between 2,947.2 tons and 3332.4 tons of gold in reserve (source: GoldSeek.com, 10/2013); b) BullionStar, 09/2014; c) Sina Finance, '黄金的战略使命 支撑人民币走向世界', 07/2014.

[11] With 1104 tonnes, Russia now has the world’s 6th largest gold reserves, officially higher than both Switzerland’s 1,040 tonnes and China’s 1054 tonnes. As well as Kazakhstan, other countries in the region have also actively been increasing official gold reserves this year including Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Source: GoldSeek, 08/2014.

2014/09/06

Wales Summit Declaration, issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council, §72 :

"We affirm therefore that cyber defence is part of NATO's core task of collective defence. A decision as to when a cyber attack would lead to the invocation of Article 5 would be taken by the North Atlantic Council on a case-by-case basis."

BUT, as Robert Madelin, director general of the European Commission’s Communications Networks, Content and Technology (CNECT) department, stated it recently:

"... there are hundreds of [cyber] attacks every day of the year. Knowing where they come from is one of the big problems."

By the way, who are the representatives of the states at the NAC ? Head of states ? Prime Ministers ?

No, not at all. Here they are. All of them are non-elected persons. None of them report to the peoples. None of them have a democratic mandate.

This means that you can NOW have any NATO deep state (they are specialized in false flag attack since a century or more) launching a cyber-attack (even against his own state), providing the same kind of proofs they've shown you with MH17, or with Iraq WMD, or Assad chemical attack... yes you've never seen anything conclusive and more and more deception, that's right.

This cyber-attack would trigger a NAC summit... some nice slides with photos of computers will be shown to an audience with no forensic expert in IT security, and an official will say abruptly that "we are absolutely sure this attack comes from Russia/China/any BRICS ally, and it is an offensive against our national security".

No independent expert will be allowed to examine the collected "proofs". If allowed, whatever his expertise and time, he would never be sure the data provided were not forged, or for whose side did the hackers really worked. As Robert Madeline said, you can make hundreds of these cyber attacks every day. You can so easily make and announce "one massive WTC like attack per day".

The fact that to be sure of where they are coming from is nearly impossible is a chance for the ones behind the false flag attacks. The only truth will be what some official will say, and the civil society will have no right neither opportunity to challenge these conclusions, never.

And according to Article 5 if US/UK insist to enforce it, this would mean all NATO States would be required to use military force against Russia, without asking previously to national Parliaments, Defense Ministers (NATO ambassadors are often diplomats with strong relations with Foreign Affairs department), only perhaps to their Head of States...
The last remaining sovereign power of European states, that is to say to declare war, would have been hijacked.

Because the decision to use Article 5 is not required to be agreed by every member of the Alliance, we anticipate a few states will resist this hijacking at the last minutes. Then we will not see a major NATO war OR the breaking of NATO Alliance. We will see a declaration of war AND the breaking of NATO at the same time. This declaration of war will be the dissolution act of NATO.

NATO is not any more a defense alliance, because it has lost since 20 years against its utter most enemy within. It is now a puppet organisation, apparently moving but collapsing as soon as it will move too far from its strings.

Update 10/14/2014 :
I had the opportunity today to discuss this question with an european general, who is daily involved with NATO. He recognized all the facts above, but said the article has been introduced "only to be prepared to new threats". He's personally believing this NATO article will not be used in case of an offensive limited to cyber attack, but only if the cyber offensive is used together with others tangible attacks.
In this case, why this important remarks have not been included into §72 ? This declaration was the longer ever produced by NATO summit. This §72 as it has been released includes a loophole, a juridical flaw which can be used to start a war on so-called legal basis. How was it possible ?

2014/09/02

It
is still difficulttodayto discussthe lack of freedom within theWestern
mainstream mediawithout being accusedof extravagance or without beingconvinced to bePutin’s
nephew.

Yet, among other things, this freedomisjust one of simple freedom`s multiple faces, and ourdetermination todefendit will only be understood if
there is the will to admitthat,
actually, there isno otherway to really winthis war in whichthe NATO
rulers want torushEurope.

Regarding the barriers put todayto the freedomof
thought, Chomsky(1), Bourdieu(2), Orwell(3), de Sélys and Collon(3b), Scott(4) or Joly(5) and many
otherspreviously have alsospoken about it long before we said itand will say it again. Particularly, the principle of consent manufacturing, once it has
beenimposed, leads to the fact that in this respectthe feelings of the masses depend on thedeleterious influenceof the
few, pushing everyone toward rushing
things, misunderstanding, suspicionorfear. All this demonstratesbetterthan anything elsethe degreeof recklessness we have reached.

One of the
good precepts of a philosophyworthy of this nameis to never spread useless wailing while
facing inevitable situations. Nowadays, the problem
in the Westis no longerhow to preserve the freedomof the press.Itisto seek ways of keeping citizens
freein front of the suppressionof such
freedom.The issue is no longer the
governments’ concern. It involves the civil society and,
first of all, the individuals.

Yet, what
would please us most of all here would be to define the conditions and means by
which, on the edge or within the war and its easements, freedom can not only be
preserved, but also shown. These means are four in number: lucidity, refusal,
irony and stubbornness.

Lucidity is the engine of our own freedom

Lucidity
supposes resistance ahead of hatred workouts and fate worship. In the world in
which we live now, and with all the experience we have, it is certain that
everything can be avoided. The war itself, which is a human phenomenon, can be
at all times avoided or stopped by human means. Just knowing the history of the
previous years regarding European politics is enough proof that wars, of any
kind, have obvious causes. This clear view of things excludes blind hatred and
chaotic despair. A free citizen, in 2014, does not despair and fights for what
he believes to be true as if his action could influence the course of events.
If he is a writer, whatever the medium, he would definitely not publish
anything that could produce hatred or cause despair. All this is in his power.

Surrender sovereignty, or else refuse to give
up

Still, a
citizen can also be a state representative. The American and British
governments tried ten years ago to
discredit the ideals of the United Nations and to dishonour all the guardians
of our collective conscience with lies, deceit and injustice(6) by drawing them
into the war in Iraq, only to be prevented in
extremis by the will and courageous voice of a French minister(7). These
same governments are now trying again to pull the strings in order to rush us
into the war in Ukraine, and soon also against Russia, using the same infamous,
shameless methods(8). However, they want to use NATO to bypass the Security
Council of the UN, having learned from their 2003 failure. The NATO Summit in
Wales on 4 and 5 September, bringing together 28 allied member states, has no
other purpose than to replace in the public eyes a resolution of the Security
Council on the next intervention in Ukraine, which will be preceded by the
arrival of the American troops in Eastern EU bases(9), and also in Italy,
Holland and Germany. That's nothing other than a reoccupation of Europe by the United States Army. The European states
have actually not left their colonial status during the past 70 years, except
during brief respites like the Gaullist period. In this respect, the TTIP and
the recent fines applied to the European banks are only ways to restore the
direct taxation of Europeans after the indirect taxation manifested through
purchases of American Treasury bonds by all states.

Which man
will find the courage to walk in the footsteps of Dominique de Villepin at the
next summit and to refuse loudly that his country follow the fatal path where
the United States and Britain want to lead the alliance? Who, without giving
into haste, misunderstanding, suspicion or fear, will remember the words of
Democritus, “a man's character makes his
fate”? In the framework of this summit, the heavy responsibility and
immense honour they have, should induce them to give priority to the
disarmament of the opponents in Ukraine, with a peace that would not be in an
Orwellian language, but instead in collaboration with the Eurasian Union.

Should we serve the lies or the freedom ?

Facing therising tideof
stupidity, it is also
necessary toopposesome refusals. All the
constraintsof the worldwill never allow for some truthfulminds
to accept to bedishonest. Nevertheless, if only oneknows themechanismofinformation, it iseasyto checkthe authenticity of anynews.That is where afree journalistanda citizen mustgive full
attention, because evenif he can’tsay whathe thinks,he
is allowed to notsay
what he does not think or what he
believes is false.This is how afreenewspaper is measured, by what it says and by what
it doesn’t say.This freedomdefined by thenegative is,by far,themost
important of all, if we know how to keep it, because it will therefore pave the waytotrue freedom.Accordingly,an independent
newspaper shows thesources of its information, helps
the public to evaluate them, repudiates
theballyhoo, removes invectivecomments, and overcomesthe
standardization ofinformation through comments.In short, it serves the truth as humanly as possible.This
measure, as relative as it is, allows him at least to deny something that no forcein the world could push him accept:
to serve lies.

This is
whatwe expect fromall contributors and columnists at the endof the nextNATO
summit.

Stubbornly cherish the
truth

This is
where things get ironical. As a principle we can say that any mind which has
the taste and the means to enforce the constraint is not subject to irony. One
can hardly imagine Kerry, Netanyahu, Fabius, Ashton, Yatsenyuk, taking just
some examples among others, using the Socratic irony. Irony remains therefore an unprecedented
weapon against the powerful. It complements the refusal by allowing not the
fallacy rejection, but the truth presentation. A free journalist, in 2014, does
not imagine his oppressors to be too intelligent. He is pessimistic regarding
human beings. A truth stated dogmatically is censored nine times out of ten in
mainstream news outlets. The same truth said pleasantly is censured only five
times out of ten. This explains why French newspapers such as Le Canard
Enchaîné can regularly publish the brave articles we all know. So, a free
journalist in 2014 is necessarily ironic, although many times still
unwillingly. Yet, truth and freedom, demanding mistresses as they are, have few
lovers.

As a matter of fact, this attitude of mind that we have briefly defined is not
efficiently sustained without a minimum of obstinacy. Many obstacles are placed
in the path of the freedom of expression. The most severe are not the ones
discouraging the people’s mind, as threats, suspensions, and lawsuits generally
produce the opposite effect than the one initially intended. Yet, we must admit
that there are discouraging obstacles: the constancy of ignorance, organized
cowardice, aggressive stupidity, ostracism, and so on and so forth. Those are
major obstacles that people must overcome. In this respect stubbornness is a
cardinal virtue. By a curious but obvious paradox, it supports objectivity and
tolerance.

Independent minds influence history

Here is a
set of rules meant to protect freedom from becoming servitude. And after that?
one will ask. After that? Let's take it easy, though. If only every Western
country’s citizens were willing to maintain in their own sphere whatever they
believe to be true and just. If only they wanted to contribute individually to
the maintenance of freedom, resist the abandonment and make their will known,
then and only then the war would be won, in the deepest sense of the word.

Yes, it is often unwillingly that a free spirit of this century shows its
irony. Is there anything funny in this world on fire? Yet, the virtue of man is
to face all that denies him. Nobody wants to start all over again today the
twice bad experiences of 1914 and 1939. We should therefore try a different
method, that of justice and transparency, under the auspices of the United
Nations, since NATO can’t take on the UN’s responsibilities, in order to lead
to inspections and peaceful disarmament. Yet, justice is only expressed in open
hearts and still clairvoyant minds. Train
these hearts and minds, wake them up, for it is the modest and ambitious task
that belongs to the independent human beings. This is something we should keep
in mind without looking further. History will or will not reflect these efforts.
But they will have been made.

Even
though, despite all our efforts, a new war ultimately occurs, Europe once again
being destroyed within the most terrible years of its long history, we must
work today for its future reconstruction. It will start by instilling the
spirit and courage, and honour. Then future generations will remember our
voices, will find our spirit and will walk in our footsteps long after NATO
will have been swallowed by history. Countries that will cultivate these values
do not cease to raise up history and mankind.